Re: [PATCH v4 0/12] ptrace: cleaning up ptrace_stop

["Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 05/05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Eric W. Biederman (11):
>>       signal: Rename send_signal send_signal_locked
>>       signal: Replace __group_send_sig_info with send_signal_locked
>>       ptrace/um: Replace PT_DTRACE with TIF_SINGLESTEP
>>       ptrace/xtensa: Replace PT_SINGLESTEP with TIF_SINGLESTEP
>>       ptrace: Remove arch_ptrace_attach
>>       signal: Use lockdep_assert_held instead of assert_spin_locked
>>       ptrace: Reimplement PTRACE_KILL by always sending SIGKILL
>>       ptrace: Document that wait_task_inactive can't fail
>>       ptrace: Admit ptrace_stop can generate spuriuos SIGTRAPs
>>       ptrace: Don't change __state
>>       ptrace: Always take siglock in ptrace_resume
>>
>> Peter Zijlstra (1):
>>       sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
>
> OK, lgtm.
>
> Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> I still dislike you removed TASK_WAKEKILL from TASK_TRACED, but I can't
> find a good argument against it ;) and yes, this is subjective.

Does anyone else have any comments on this patchset?

If not I am going to apply this to a branch and get it into linux-next.

Eric